Brexit Or the Madness of Plutocracy

Brexit vote tomorrow. This is a completely idiotic, immoral referendum organized by anti-Europeans (Cameron & Al.) against even more strident anti-Europeans (right wing Nazi like extremists plutocrats’ servants and hedge fund managers desirous to keep their manger in Great Britain’s archipelago of tax havens). There are trite pros and cons of BRitain EXIT referendum, all over the media. Here are mine:

The fundamental mood motivating the will to exit the European Union is as ugly, violent, racist, tribal, and, to put it in one word, Nazi as it gets. The extreme right-wing fringe of the right-wing party in England launched it. For them Margaret Thatcher, who campaigned for, and ratified the Single European Act is a left-wing Marxist traitor. This was demonstrated by MP Jo Cox’s assassination by a… Nazi whose most cherished possession is a manuscript from Adolf Hitler. Even imbeciles should be able to understand that one. A Nazi assassinates in the most gory fashion the defenseless mother of two young children, just like the original, most excited Brexiters want to assassinate Europe.

In particular, full bloodied Brexiters hate the “ever closer Union” concept. They have understood no history whatsoever.

So it’s hilarious how ill-informed some people are, who scream that Trump is a racist right extremist while supporting Brexit. Just like Hitler, they want to build a particular sort of Europe which hates. The head of Brexit, Nigel Farage posed in front of a flow of Muslim refugees, calling it the “Breaking Point”. It could not get any clearer. Guess what? After Farage flaunted this blatantly racist act, the pro-Brexit faction surged. How much clearer can one be?

Head Of Brexit Faction, Nigel Farage, Said That, To Defeat The Muslim Refugee Flow, Britain Has To Close Her Borders With Europe. That Made His Popularity Surge

The European Union as it is does not work. But if one asks US citizens whether they like the “direction of the USA”, or the US Congress, most of them say no by up to 85%. Still, no American idiot has come up to suggest a USexit referendum. There were USexit votes around 1860, and those votes brought the deadliest American conflict, which killed 3% of the US population (thsat would be ten million killed, using the US population for 2016).

The British population is not the most dissatisfied by present European Union government (the so-called EC ”Commission”, a ridiculous name). The British are much more satisfied than the French, whose dissatisfaction is only surpassed by the Greeks. Still the French have not been proposed a referendum about whether they want to be in the European Union (in 2005 the French and the Dutch turned down a proposed Constitution of the EU; a more modest reform was ratified in the conventional manner). Of course they do. Why? Because the French do not confuse improving the European Union, and destroying it.

The alternative to the European Union and its “ever closer union” is war. War from “ever greater disunion” was tried before. Plutocracy would love to try it some more. War is to real plutocrats what golf is to basic oligarchs. War does not have to occur tomorrow, it’s best served cold, and starts with tariffs. (Not that tariffs cannot be justified, they can, and could be for a number of excellent reasons, some of them, like a carbon tax, approved of by the World Trade Organization). The French are much more angry against the EC than the British. But don’t throw the EU baby with the EC bath.

***

The crisis of refugees flooding into Europe is striking and intolerable. It has a precedent: this is exactly the problem Rome encountered, starting around 110 BCE. Consul Marius then solved the invasion by exterminating the three German tribes which were invading the Roman Republic in three battles (two of which happened next to Aix-en-Provence, and are celebrated to this day, in the names of locales). The Germans kept on trying to invade, and the situation became overwhelming when cretin Christian (sorry for the pleonasm) emperor Valens, to demonstrate his power did not wait for his nephew Gratian to come over with the Western Roman army (co-emperor Gratian was close-by, and marching in). The Goths then exterminated the Oriental Roman Army, and ended taking Rome, a generation later (410 CE).

The Renovated Roman empire led by the Franks suffered an even more severe sequence of simultaneous invasions in the Seventh and Eighth Century. In 715 CE, the Muslims were in Narbonne (an important regional capital in Rome). The Franks were the first to call themselves “Europeans”, and it is because they were “Europeans” that they won.

Headless, without armies, all its armies having been destroyed by the Franks and a subsequent, related revolt of the Berbers in 740 CE, the Caliphate based in Damascus then collapsed in civil war (750 CE) and the Franks started the reconquest of Spain, before the reign of Charlemagne, establishing the Marca Hispanica as early as 785 CE.

“A victorious line of march had been prolonged above a thousand miles from the rock of Gibraltar to the banks of the Loire; the repetition of an equal space would have carried the Saracens to the confines of Poland and the Highlands of Scotland; the Rhine is not more impassable than the Nile or Euphrates, and the Arabian fleet might have sailed without a naval combat into the mouth of the Thames. Perhaps the interpretation of the Koran would now be taught in the schools of Oxford, and her pulpits might demonstrate to a circumcised people the sanctity and truth of the revelation of Mahomet.”

Could something good come out of Brexit? Yes, sure. Contrarily to what the fanatical tribal puppets of global plutocracy (whose international headquarters are Great Britain) believe, ever greater union is the way out of ALL European problems. Brexit could kick out a fifth columnist, a saboteur, and encourage the others to get together.

Those who want to divide Europe, instead of making it stronger are the real traitors. And the real enemies of freedom. To defend the borders of Europe, a European army had to march into Syria, after removing the dictator plutocrat Assad, dear to London, thanks to his assets. Anything short of this is nothing.

For decades, stupid anti-Europeans in Britain have thought cool, smart and extremely British to declare the European Union was a “club”. Not, it’s not. Please read that again: it’s an union. Union. Get it? If you want a tax haven, go live in the British Virgin Island tax haven. The time of stealing other Europeans is near. Actually, it has arrived. Nothing like a whiff of exasperation. After all, that’s what did the Nazis in.

26 Responses to “Brexit Or the Madness of Plutocracy”

Patrice Ayme said: ‘The head of Brexit, Nigel Farage, posed in front of a flow of Muslim refugees, calling it the “Breaking Point”. Racism could not get clearer’
Nola — NO to EU!
Jun 22
@Tyranosopher seesaw with skinhead shouting at old colored lady perhaps. The photo Nigel showed was truth – remain campaign created theirs

Farage made a clear appeal to racism and the rejection of helping people in distress. That is what makes him popular. There are many things wrong with this picture. The racism is blatant, truth or not.
From the hard core military strategic point of view it is also idiotic. Farage and his co-conspirators make the same mistake as Roman military commanders did after Trajan: they do not understand that the enemy is fought best in its lair.

@Geezajay2013 This kind of insanely hateful rhetoric caused the assassination of Jo Cox. Are you comparing Merkel to the Kaiser or Hitler? That imbalanced sinkers such as you have 18,000 followers on Twitter (!) is a testimony to the fact that the mood which led to the assassination of Jo Cox has many co-conspirators.

Even if Brexit fails, it will be by such a short margin that the 800 pound gorilla will very much remain around, scratching its smelly armpits and generally fouling the atmosphere. It would be folly for the EU to deem it dead and forget about it. It is time for strategic thinking.

For centuries, Britain’s Continental policy has been of dividing and ruling. In fact its current tantrum is over its failure to achieve significant success despite its tenacious hobbling of the Union.

Time to give it a taste of its medicine. Britain’s non-English regions are (rather) for remaining in the UE. The EU should acknowledge this and give them an extra sweet deal, either as EU regions or non-EU but friendly regions, while rolling back the red carpet it extended to the UK. (after all what did it gain from its friendliness?).

The Auld Alliance is still fondly remembered in some parts… let’s give it another try.

Agreed. The Brexit propaganda extends to the USA, from the same plutocrats propaganda: Murdoch (master Brexiter) was saying vicious counterfactual lies about France in the Wall Street Journal yesterday. Initially that guy was heir of the media owner in Perth, Australia. A preferred lies is that Britisah GDP a third higher than the French one…

The thirteen million papers published each day in Britain are all pluto owned and that’s more than four times as many papers as in France (which has a higher population). They are all stridently racist anti-European.

Truth is, you cannot have democracy without nationalism. For democracy, you need something that will force people to put common interest above their own, and historically, only the nationalism was powerful enough to create such an effect. European Union is a plutocratic entity, and its attack on nationalism – through policies of multiculturalism, political correctness, federalization, regionalization – is attack on democracy itself. Tribal loyalty is a must for democracy – if you look at history, only small groups of people with strong tribal loyalty have managed to form democratic societies (primal societies, and some Mediterranean city-states). So I want European Union, but not as it is – confederalization would be the answer, not a borderless federation.

So as far as UK goes, Brexit might harm or help democracy – European Union itself is clearly antidemocratic. But if Britain leaves the EU, it might liberate itself from clutches of European plutocracy to fall into clutches of Angloamerican plutocracy instead.

Most Muslim refugees are actually economic immigrants, not to say jihadis by inertia. If you look at history – Roman Empire, etc. – you will see that countries can successfuly integrate only so many people at any given time. Greater the cultural differences, smaller the number of people that can be integrated. Islamic culture is different from European one, meaning that integration is difficult. And if too many people come into Europe in short time, they will not integrate, which means civil war. Most of Muslim “immigrants” are young men, with no women or children. That is a clear invasion. Islam is a weapon that plutocracy uses to destroy nationalism and democracy (as one Imam said, democracy is contrary to Islam, because Muslims submit themselves to Allah and His representatives).

Fact is, plutocracy has taken over European Union. There is no need for a new pan-European war because, with formation of European Union, plutocracy has achieved its goal of transnational, plutocratic superstate. European Union is plutocracy’s victory. It is telling that Adolf Hitler, plutocracy’s premier agent, dreamed up European Union.

World Wars happen when plutocracy has to achieve a goal it cannot fulfill in peace. Frankly, I would prefer World War III to plutocracy’s victory.

What you wrote, very well and cogently to be sure, is really a rehash of tired, predictable memes which do sound like a caricature or a lampoon, and were repeatedly crushed flat on this blog, so I won’t bother addressing them one by one.

Since you insist on being a genuine commenter, I can only thank you for sharing your beliefs with us.

That’s a bit beneath you, don’t you think? More passive-agressive than your usual responses, and IMHO unwarranted re picard578. We all stand on shaky ground (not because of that Brexit idiocy), I’m sure that we can all at least agree with that, “rehash of tired, predictable memes which do sound like a caricature or a lampoon” be damned.

Hmmm, Dominique… If you think Picard578 is an avatar for myself, you are in for a surprise… ;-). Picard (not his real name but an homage to Star Trek’s Captain Picard character) has his own site:https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/author/picard578/
Presently adorned with a picture of the magnificent French cuirasse’ Richelieu… Picard does not usually splurge at the trough of Conventional Wisdom and unbalanced West Country Men mentality… Far from it. Picard has actually re-blogged many of my essays, and is much esteemed (not just for that). In particular he thinks the F35 is inferior to the Rafale…

From a more general point of view, the situation with the raging small minded racists in Britain is funny enough, it does really need much more drole maneuvers to emphasize how ridiculous it is…

That democracy requires nationalism is a thesis refuted by the philosophers who advised Pericles. (One of them was his wife, herself a prominent philsopher.) That was 25 centuries ago. Instead Percilcles, in his famous FUNERAL ORATION, promoted the exact opposite model of democracy:

Democracy makes it so people can better themselves and their position in society through merit rather than class or money. Thus democracy, at the outset, is against privileges from birth (where the “natio” in nationalism comes from) Pericles emphasized that democracy guarantees privacy and equal justice for all (thus the American spy networks and paid justice are bad). Instead of the rage of birthrights, Pericles promoted the OPEN SOCIETY: nothing to hide, except our valor and excellence…

“That democracy requires nationalism is a thesis refuted by the philosophers who advised Pericles.”

There was no modern nationalism during Pericles’ times, and in any case Athens’ case is unapplicable to today’s countries. One problem is sheer size, you cannot have a direct democracy even with small nation-state. For that reason, a communal feeling has to be created, which means nationalism – otherwise elites feel no attachment to the masses, and you get plutocracy. Secondly, Athens was not a democracy in modern sense. It was aristocracy, or a low-level plutocracy; only people with certain amount of wealth – not very large compared to outright aristocratic countries, but far larger than average – had any impact on the decision making. Majority of Athens’ inhabitants were disenfranchised at any given time, and Athens itself, much like Dubrovnik later, took measures to isolate foreigners from political influence.

Besides, philosophers tend to speak a lot of garbage. You have to study actual history – as in events – to see what works and what does not. Anything else is just words, and words are wind.

“Democracy makes it so people can better themselves and their position in society through merit rather than class or money. Thus democracy, at the outset, is against privileges from birth (where the “natio” in nationalism comes from) Pericles emphasized that democracy guarantees privacy and equal justice for all (thus the American spy networks and paid justice are bad). Instead of the rage of birthrights, Pericles promoted the OPEN SOCIETY: nothing to hide, except our valor and excellence…”

That would require humans to stop being… well, human. You cannot create a soceity meant for gods, apply it to humans, and expect success. Humans are flawed, and these flaws are not going away, ever. That is why nationalism is required to counter other tribalistic and individualistic feelings and force people to work for the good of the society, instead their own bottom line. Because if you don’t have anything to counter human stupidity and selfishness, society falls apart – as we are today witnessing in basically all liberal Western countries.

Open society is good when nobody is trying to kill you. But primary duty of any society is survival, anything that goes against that goal should be thrown into the garbage bin, no matter how nice and principled it sounds. Of course, often our own leaders become the greatest threat – but that again requires communal feeling, so that people can actually organize to remove them.

Hitler was, first of all a pan-German nationalist. He hated, but respected the French. Told he would lose the war, if he did not treat France better, he obeyed his cabinet. Later, he bemoaned that France would then win the war if Germany did so on the battlefield. Then he obeyed his cabinet/ Later he ordered to “burn Paris”, but his top henchmen, instead, negotiated with the Resistance. Other top Nazis were treating the French honorably by 1944, in total opposition to their war crime style they yielded earlier.

The Waffen SS became an international army, there again not thanks to Hitler…

I would not really call Frankish Empire a European Union. Sure, it did unite many various peoples in one state, but it was an empire both in essence and in organization (unlike EU, which is an empire in essence but not in organization).

It is ironic that too much unity can create a division. It was Yugoslav / Belgrade unitarism which sparked nationalist feelings in the republics. Similarly, large systems become unwieldy and useless. Democracy by its nature results in a large political organization relative to the polity size, which means that, when too large, it becomes unwieldy. When too small however, it becomes too vulnerable to outside influences. I’d say that medium-sized nation-state is an ideal point, but again it needs to have a force to keep it together, and insulate it against the outside influence.

Because open borders, open markets are one of the greatest weapons of plutocracy against democracy. As ANC discovered, controlling political establishment of the country gives you no power or freedom if you are at the same time under economic occupation. And with its neoliberal, no-borders politics, European Union is all about economic – and political – occupation of smaller nation-states. Croatia has been under EU’s occupation since the year 2000.

The Franks conquered the two-thirds of Germany the Romans did not durably control (only around 1/5 of present day Germany proper was really Roman). And Frankish control did not just stick, it CREATED Germany. In the Eight Century, the Franks imposed all THEIR VERSION of the German language (Hoch Deutch, different from the Low Countries Frankish). Then the “RENOVATED” Roman empire went on for another millennium, until the pathologically megalomaniac imbecile known as Napoleon destroyed it formally in 1804. The other piece being France, and the UK its successor state (and also Spain, and Italy, and Austria, etc.)

The refugee crisis shows that the European Union needs to a MILITARY Empire. And a civilizational empire. An emergency way would be to unleash France. Right now France is running a 4.5% deficit, in blatant violation of Euro Zone and EMU rules. When asked why he did not do anything about it, J C Junker replied:”Because it’s France”… Actually he said it in German… To unleash France, France has to unleash herself from her own interior mental enemies (the pseudo-left of the 1950s: Sartre and company)…

The idiots who have been saying France is Germany’s poodle miss the little detail that France is in massive wars and related massive spending, while letting Germany run away with relatively minor questions… Like what to do with refugees…

The European Union we have now, ironically enough, is British enforced: all about a free market. With Britain kicked out, Franco-Germania, the European dream of the Franks which resisted to all the invasion and blockade of Europe by the Muslims, will re-assert itself. Britain would be reduced to the dog, bull or not, that it can only be.

“The refugee crisis shows that the European Union needs to a MILITARY Empire.”

First thing first. Before anything else can be done, European Union needs to be taken back from the plutocrats who control it right now.

“The European Union we have now, ironically enough, is British enforced: all about a free market. With Britain kicked out, Franco-Germania, the European dream of the Franks which resisted to all the invasion and blockade of Europe by the Muslims, will re-assert itself. ”

Yes, neoliberal no-borders free-trade areas is what British Empire was always about. Britain built its empire because of free trade, it started Opium Wars to keep Chinese markets open, it started First World War to secure trade routes to East, it helped bring Hitler to power to defend against Communism, it formed two Yugoslavias to secure Balkans route against the Germany. So yeah, I’d say that Britain really needs to be kicked out of the European Union, and EU itself has to take measures to preserve nation-states that make it up, and their cultural, linguistic, ethnic etc. heritage. Diversity is Europe’s greatest treasure, and it is diversity which produces ideas. Which is why plutocrats use multiculturalistic melting pots to destroy said diversity.